USPTO serial 78304448
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
If you own this trademark, we can monitor new filings and help with USPTO deadlines. If you do not, we can file a new U.S. application.
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Mark E. Miller
MARK E MILLER O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP275 BATTERY ST 26TH FLSAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111UNITED STATES| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer hardware and software for designing and manufacturing semiconductor wafers, masks, and reticles; metrology and inspections tools for measuring, detecting, inspecting, and sensing chemical compositions, temperature, light images, thickness, flatness, texture, line width, and contamination of semiconductor wafers, masks, and reticles during the manufacturing process | ACTIVE | — |
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 15, 2005 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Aug 15, 2005 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Dec 2, 2004 | FAXX | FAX SENT | — |
| Dec 1, 2004 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Dec 1, 2004 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Nov 4, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 25, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 20, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 12, 2004 | FAXX | FAX SENT | — |
| Oct 12, 2004 | FAXX | FAX SENT | — |
| Apr 20, 2004 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Apr 15, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |